Timlin v. Scranton (No. 2)
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by Baldrige, J.,
This appeal is from the order of the court below making absolute a rule to show cause why a sci. fa. to bring upon the record additional defendants in a trespass action, and the verdict of $500 in favor of the original defendant against the sci. fa. defendants, should not be set aside.
Mary Timlin brought an action against the city of Scranton to recover for personal injuries sustained as a result of a fall on the sidewalk in front of the property owned and occupied by the additional defendants. The summons and plaintiff’s statement of claim, which clearly identified…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Vinnacombe v. Phila. Am. S.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1929
- East Broad Top Transit Co. v. FloodSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1937
- Carroll v. Quaker City Cabs, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1932
- Nunamaker for Use v. FinneganSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1933
- Clineff v. Rubash (Goldsmith)Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Elser v. Union Paving Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1950
- Timlin v. Scranton (No. 1)Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1940
- Helfstein v. Milikovsky, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County1940